About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
with congress as of this date. so i remember that john bolton -- the john bolton episode pretty well. our democratic friends felt like john bolton didn't have the information he needed to make an informed decision to make -- about ambassador bolton's qualification, john bolton, to be ambassador and democrats dug in their heels say, we're not going to vote or consider this nomination until we get basic answers to our concerns. all i can tell you is the concerns i have are greater today than they were before, and we're not close to getting the basic answers. >> i have many more questions that need to be answered. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] rhett credit [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> that news conference from late this morning. late that's right white house, press secretary jay carney also answered questions about the benghazi attack and announced that the president will meet with middle class family this is week in pennsylvania to talk about the fiscal cliff and the deficit. mr. carney says, quote, the american people matter in stopp
today's meeting? ambassador john bolton is here. your thoughts on the meeting with ambassador rice on capitol hill. >> from susan rice's point of view, this is a disaster, an opportunity to try to draw the sting out of the opposition that had been expressed by senator mccain and the others. obviously went in the opposite direction, when have you all three senator who is participated in the meeting, coming out after saying they have more questions now than they did before. this was a bad meeting, no doubt about it. i think part of the problem here is the continued focus by the white house, by susan rice, by people looking at it, on these so-called talk points that somebody provided to her. i will just put it this way, based on my own experience in government, nobody who's truly competent reads talking points for any purpose. if you are good enough to be a senior american official, you ought to be able to use your own words. i am not saying you make up policy. you obviously follow policy, as set by the president. but the notion that you can be a cabinet-level official and be given ta
compared rice to john bolton who democrats blocked after bush nominated him to be u.n. ambassador. remember, he ended up being a recess appointment. asked by defense news whether he'll put a hold on rice's nomination if she is appointed graham said, quote, oh, absolutely. i would place a hold on anybody who wanted to be promoted to any job who had a role in the benghazi situation. now rice clearly did not have the day the white house envisioned. the question is whether her outreach went so badly that it somehow scares the president and the white house and they decide it's not worth the heavy lift to nominate her. ultimately everyone believes rice is confirmable. the question is whether the white house wants the headache it will be to get her confirmed. john mccain made it clear on fox yesterday that if the president appoints senator john kerry, the road to confirmation will look quite a bit different. >> john kerry came within a whisker of being president of the united states. i think that works in his favor. i don't have anything in his ba background like this tragedy in benghazi that woul
to cats again, yesterday, when he said i remember what happened with john bolton. so this could be payback time for democrats blocking the nomination. >> ooh interesting. >> bill: as u.n. ambassador under george bush. and bush ended up appointing him as an interim appointment or whatever they call that. right? >> which he can't do anymore. >> bill: so that could be what this is all about. but of course, john bolton is the one who said we ought to lop off the top ten floors of the u.n. he was hardly qualified to be u.n. ambassador. victoria jones in studio with us. we'll be joined very shortly by dan from the center for american progress. keep the conversation going. >> announcer: this is the "bill press show." >>i jump out of my skin at people when i'm upset. do you share the sense of outrage that they're doing this, this corruption based on corruption based on corruption. >>i think that's an understatement, eliot. u>> i'm not prone tot. understatement, so explain to me why that is. i think the mob learned from wall st., not vice
john bolton who has worked for years to make sure this doesn't happen on what it all means, next. jon: republicans say they are willing to show some willingness to come proceed myself on taxes in a grand bargain to help the nation avoid falling off the fiscal cliff. senate democrats, though, are refusing to negotiate taking a hard line against cuts to entitlements like medicare and social security benefits. so where does this all leave us? we heard the president weighing in on it moments ago. let's talk about it with bob cusack, managing editor of the hill. is either side bulging or blinking right now, bob? >> well, if any side is drinking right now it's the republican side because they are trying to wrestle with what they should give up on on taxes, whether that is increasing tax rates or withholdings. democrats, fresh off the election, using that political capital, they are seeing more and more is off the table. in 2011 the president said everything should be on the table, that included entitlement reform. now democrats are saying, social security we shouldn't mess with, these what
works. meanwhile, john bolton, who was our union i wouldn't know ambassador to -- united nations ambassador, he said what he's seen so far, this is not good. >> i'll just put it this way based on my own experience in government, nobody who is truly competent reads talking points for any purpose. if you're good enough to be a senior american official, you ought to be able to use your own words. i'm not saying you make up policy. you obviously follow policy as set by the president. but the notion that you can be a cabinet level official and be given talking points that you simply parrot without further question is mind boggling. >> brian: i'll add this, if you want to know if ambassador rice is capable of being the secretary of state, you have to look at her background. stanford, great schools, right? oxford, i heard is a very good school. not a community college. so i heard that's pretty impresssive. she worked for candidates kerry and dukakis, but she was national security advisor with bill clinton, at which time bill clinton made ace hug best mistake, allowing the genocide to go
.n. ambassador could have gotten something done? do you think if we had a john bolton, for example, they could have convinced russia to go against syria? do you think so? >> short answer is, i don't think. but i think it pays to ask the questions. this person is being put forward as secretary of state. what have you done in your post to warrant that? she was also, by the way, absent at the initial vote on the attempt the to break the israeli blockade that was launched out of turkey. when the u.n. convened an emergency session, again at the first session she was nowhere to be found. that's why i said there were other things that could be brought forward at a hearing like that. megyn: i want to talk to you, though, about whether this is secretary rice or ambassador rice's, you know, problem or whether this is a president obama problem. who sets the policy? and i also want to ask you about the other possible choice, which is john kerry. we'll do that after the break. ♪ ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] while you're getting ready for the holidays, we're getting ready for you. tis the season. for food,
the place, judges, republicans, who have been on hold. now when lindsey graham mentioned was john bolton and that was a clear warning because john bolton, as you know, was not confirmed for u.n. a.m. b ambassador and was a recess appointee. there's no way the president is going to nominate as secretary of state as a recess appointee. you just cannot with credibility lead diplomacy around the world. this week we'll have a debate -- tomorrow there's a debate in the general assembly of the united nations on palestinian state hood. it is symbolic but now france is going along with the rest of the general assembly. the united states and israel and a few others will stand alone against this symbolic gesture. it's considered a very important move by the weakened fatah branch of the palestinians after what's happened with fgaza and hamas. real things at stake here. and susan rice has to stand up there and represent the united states and there's got to be a lot of weakening of her position. >>> coming up next, "the last lion." a definitive biography on winston churchill 20 years in the making was
the episode pretty well. our democratic friends felt like a john bolton didn't have the information needed to make an informed decision about ambassador bolton's qualifications. john bolton, the then ambassador, and democratic saying we're not going to go, we're not going to consider this domination domination in till we get basic answers to our concern. all i can do is that the concerns i have are greater today than they were before, and we're not even close to getting the basic answers. [inaudible] >> i have many more questions that need to be answered. [inaudible] >> ambassador rice released a statement about that meeting with senators mccain, graham and kelly ayotte saying in part in the course of the meeting we explained that the talking points provided by the intelligence community and the initial assessment upon which they were based were incorrect in the key respect. there was no protester demonstration in benghazi. while we certainly wish that we had perfect information just days after the terrorist attack as is often the case, the intelligence assessment has evolved. we stressed
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)